As scholars interested in
religion and public life, we protest the manipulation of religion and the
debasing of moral language in the discussion about presidential responsibility.
We believe that serious misunderstandings of repentance and forgiveness
are being exploited for political advantage. The resulting moral confusion
is a threat to the integrity of American religion and to the foundations
of a civil society. In the conviction that politics and morality cannot
be separated, we consider the current crisis to be a critical moment in
the life of our country and, therefore, offer the following points for
consideration:

1. Many of us worry about the political misuse of religion
and religious symbols even as we endorse the public mission of our churches,
synagogues, and mosques. In particular we are concerned about the distortion
that can come by association with presidential power in events like the
Presidential Prayer Breakfast on September 11. We fear the religious community
is in danger of being called upon to provide authentication for a politically
motivated and incomplete repentance that seeks to avert serious consequences
for wrongful acts. While we affirm that pastoral counseling sessions are
an appropriate, confidential arena to address these issues, we fear that
announcing such meetings to convince the public of the President's sincerity
compromises the integrity of religion.

2. We challenge the widespread assumption that forgiveness
relieves a person of further responsibility and serious consequences. We
are convinced that forgiveness is a relational term that does not function
easily within the sphere of constitutional accountability. A wronged party
chooses forgiveness instead of revenge and antagonism, but this does not
relieve the wrong-doer of consequences. When the President continues to
deny any liability for the sins he has confessed, this suggests that the
public display of repentance was intended to avoid political disfavor.

3. We are aware that certain moral qualities are central
to the survival of our political system, among which are truthfulness,
integrity, respect for the law, respect for the dignity of others, adherence
to the constitutional process, and a willingness to avoid the abuse of
power. We reject the premise that violations of these ethical standards
should be excused so long as a leader remains loyal to a particular political
agenda and the nation is blessed by a strong economy. Elected leaders are
accountable to the Constitution and to the people who elected them. By
his own admission the President has departed from ethical standards by
abusing his presidential office, by his ill use of women, and by his knowing
manipulation of truth for indefensible ends. We are particularly troubled
about the debasing of the language of public discourse with the aim of
avoiding responsibility for one's actions.

4. We are concerned about the impact of this crisis on
our children and on our students. Some of them feel betrayed by a President
in whom they set their hopes while others are troubled by his misuse of
others, by which many in the administration, the political system, and
the media were implicated in patterns of deceit and abuse. Neither our
students nor we demand perfection. Many of us believe that extreme dangers
sometimes require a political leader to engage in morally problematic actions.
But we maintain that in general there is a reasonable threshold of behavior
beneath which our public leaders should not fall, because the moral character
of a people is more important than the tenure of a particular politician
or the protection of a particular political agenda. Political and religious
history indicate that violations and misunderstandings of such moral issues
may have grave consequences. The widespread desire to "get this behind
us" does not take seriously enough the nature of transgressions and their
social effects.

5. We urge the society as a whole to take account of the
ethical commitments necessary for a civil society and to seek the integrity
of both public and private morality. While partisan conflicts have usually
dominated past debates over public morality, we now confront a much deeper
crisis, whether the moral basis of the constitutional system itself will
be lost. In the present impeachment discussions, we call for national courage
in deliberation that avoids ideological division and engages the process
as a constitutional and ethical imperative. We ask Congress to discharge
its current duty in a manner mindful of its solemn constitutional and political
responsibilities. Only in this way can the process serve the good of the
nation as a whole and avoid further sensationalism.

6. While some of us think that a presidential resignation
or impeachment would be appropriate and others envision less drastic consequences,
we are all convinced that extended discussion about constitutional, ethical,
and religious issues will be required to clarify the situation and to enable
a wise decision to be made. We hope to provide an arena in which such discussion
can occur in an atmosphere of scholarly integrity and civility without
partisan bias.